do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (OJ L 396, 30.12.2006 , p. 1.)) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 69/08
Date: 2022-02-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: chemical product, health control, health risk, market approval, marketing standard, solvent








C_2022069EN.01000801.xml










10.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 69/8






Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)


(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1)
)


(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 69/08)

Decision granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holders of the authorisation


Authorisation number


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2022)524


3.2.2022


bis(2-methoxyethyl)ether (diglyme) EC No 203-924-4; CAS No 111-96-6


Acton Technologies Limited


REACH/22/2/0


As a carrier solvent in the formulation and subsequent application of sodium naphthalide etchant for fluoropolymer surface modification whilst preserving article structural integrity (in-house processes)


3 February 2034


In accordance with Article 60(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, risk is adequately controlled
There are no suitable alternatives.




REACH/22/2/1


As a carrier solvent in the application of sodium naphthalide etchant for fluoropolymer surface modification whilst preserving article structural integrity (downstream user processes)






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006 , p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm
Case C-564/20: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court — Ireland) — PF, MF v Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Sea Fisheries Protection Authority (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common fisheries policy — Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 — Control system — Article 33(2)(a) and Article 34 — Recording of catches and fishing effort — Transmission to the European Commission of information concerning the quantities of nephrops caught — Possibility to use data other than those contained in the fishing logbook — Reasonable and scientifically valid method to process and verify data — Closure of fisheries)
Date: 2022-02-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, authorised catch, common fisheries policy, crustacean, data processing, disclosure of information, exchange of information, fishing controls, fishing permit, fishing rights








C_2022148EN.01000601.xml










4.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/6






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court — Ireland) — PF, MF v Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Sea Fisheries Protection Authority
(Case C-564/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common fisheries policy - Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 - Control system - Article 33(2)(a) and Article 34 - Recording of catches and fishing effort - Transmission to the European Commission of information concerning the quantities of nephrops caught - Possibility to use data other than those contained in the fishing logbook - Reasonable and scientifically valid method to process and verify data - Closure of fisheries)
(2022/C 148/08)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Supreme Court

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: PF, MF

Defendants: Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Sea Fisheries Protection Authority

Operative part of the judgment

Article 33(2)(a) and Article 34 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy, amending Regulations (EC) No 847/96, (EC) No 2371/2002, (EC) No 811/2004, (EC) No 768/2005, (EC) No 2115/2005, (EC) No 2166/2005, (EC) No 388/2006, (EC) No 509/2007, (EC) No 676/2007, (EC) No 1098/2007, (EC) No 1300/2008, (EC) No 1342/2008 and repealing Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1627/94 and (EC) No 1966/2006, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2015/812 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015, must be interpreted to the effect that the Single Control Authority of a Member State is not required to notify to the European Commission only the data recorded by the masters of fishing vessels in the fishing logbook, pursuant to Articles 14 and 15 of that regulation, but may use a reasonable and scientifically valid method, such as the ‘time spent’ methodology, to process those data in order to ensure the accuracy of the catch figures that it notifies to the Commission.


(1)  OJ C 19, 18.1.2021.
Case C-487/20: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 10 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia — Romania) — Philips Orăştie S.R.L. v Direcţia Generală de Administrare a Marilor Contribuabili (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Articles 179 and 183 — Right to deduct VAT — Conditions — Compensation or refund of excess VAT — Additional liabilities — Principle of fiscal neutrality — Principles of equivalence and effectiveness)
Date: 2022-02-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, tax collection, tax harmonisation, tax law, tax offence, tax relief








C_2022148EN.01000401.xml










4.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/4






Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 10 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia — Romania) — Philips Orăştie S.R.L. v Direcţia Generală de Administrare a Marilor Contribuabili
(Case C-487/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Harmonisation of fiscal legislation - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Articles 179 and 183 - Right to deduct VAT - Conditions - Compensation or refund of excess VAT - Additional liabilities - Principle of fiscal neutrality - Principles of equivalence and effectiveness)
(2022/C 148/05)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Philips Orăştie S.R.L.

Defendant: Direcţia Generală de Administrare a Marilor Contribuabili

Operative part of the judgment

The first paragraph of Article 179 and the first paragraph of Article 183 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as well as the principle of equivalence, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which lays down detailed procedural rules governing actions for the refund of value added tax (VAT), based on an infringement of the common system of VAT, less favourable than those applicable to similar actions based on an infringement of domestic law relating to duties and taxes other than VAT.


(1)  OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.
Case C-522/20: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 10 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — OE v VY (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Validity — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction to hear and determine an application for divorce — Article 18 TFEU — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Fifth and sixth indents of Article 3(1)(a) — Difference between the length of the residence period required for the purposes of determining which court has jurisdiction — Distinction between a resident who is a national of the Member State of the court before which the application is brought and a resident who is not a national of that Member State — No discrimination on grounds of nationality)
Date: 2022-02-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: discrimination on the basis of nationality, divorce, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, national, residence








C_2022148EN.01000502.xml










4.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/5






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 10 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — OE v VY
(Case C-522/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Validity - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Jurisdiction to hear and determine an application for divorce - Article 18 TFEU - Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 - Fifth and sixth indents of Article 3(1)(a) - Difference between the length of the residence period required for the purposes of determining which court has jurisdiction - Distinction between a resident who is a national of the Member State of the court before which the application is brought and a resident who is not a national of that Member State - No discrimination on grounds of nationality)
(2022/C 148/07)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: OE

Defendant: VY

Operative part of the judgment

The principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality, enshrined in Article 18 TFEU, must be interpreted as not precluding a situation in which the jurisdiction of the courts of the Member State in the territory of which the habitual residence of the applicant is located, as provided for in the sixth indent of Article 3(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000, is subject to the applicant being resident for a minimum period immediately before making his or her application which is six months shorter than that provided for in the fifth indent of Article 3(1)(a) of that regulation on the ground that the person concerned is a national of that Member State.


(1)  OJ C 35, 1.2.2021.
Case C-219/20: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark — Austria) — LM v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Hartberg-Fürstenfeld (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom to provide services — Posting of workers — Directive 96/71/EC — Article 3(1)(c) — Terms and conditions of employment — Remuneration — Article 5 — Penalties — Limitation period — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 41 — Right to good administration — Article 47 — Effective judicial protection)
Date: 2022-02-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: freedom to provide services, labour law, limitation of legal proceedings, penalty, posted worker, remuneration of work, right to justice, working conditions








C_2022148EN.01000301.xml










4.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/3






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark — Austria) — LM v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Hartberg-Fürstenfeld
(Case C-219/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Freedom to provide services - Posting of workers - Directive 96/71/EC - Article 3(1)(c) - Terms and conditions of employment - Remuneration - Article 5 - Penalties - Limitation period - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 41 - Right to good administration - Article 47 - Effective judicial protection)
(2022/C 148/03)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: LM

Defendant: Bezirkshauptmannschaft Hartberg-Fürstenfeld

Intervener: Österreichische Gesundheitskasse

Operative part of the judgment

Article 5 of Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services, read in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in the light of the general principle of EU law relating to the right to good administration, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation providing for a five-year limitation period for failure to comply with obligations relating to the remuneration of posted workers.


(1)  OJ C 304, 14.9.2020.
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/697 of 10 February 2022 correcting the Polish language version of Regulation (EU) No 139/2014 laying down requirements and administrative procedures related to aerodromes pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2022-02-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Translation, European Commission
Subjects: European Aviation Safety Agency, air safety, airport, approval, civil aviation, roadworthiness tests








L_2022130EN.01000101.xml










4.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 130/1








            COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) 2022/697
of 10 February 2022
         
correcting the Polish language version of Regulation (EU) No 139/2014 laying down requirements and administrative procedures related to aerodromes pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council
(Text with EEA relevance)


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2018 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Union Aviation Safety Agency, and amending Regulations (EC) No 2111/2005, (EC) No 1008/2008, (EU) No 996/2010, (EU) No 376/2014 and Directives 2014/30/EU and 2014/53/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Regulations (EC) No 552/2004 and (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91 (1), and in particular Article 39(1) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


The Polish language version of Annex I to Commission Regulation (EU) No 139/2014 (2) contains an error in point 41b(b) which affects the scope of the definition of the term ‘SNOWTAM’ applicable from 12 August 2021.












(2)


The Polish language version of Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 139/2014 should therefore be corrected accordingly. The other language versions are not affected,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1

(does not concern the English language)



Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 10 February 2022.


For the Commission


The President

Ursula VON DER LEYEN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 212, 22.8.2018, p. 1.

(2)  Commission Regulation (EU) No 139/2014 of 12 February 2014 laying down requirements and administrative procedures related to aerodromes pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 44, 14.2.2014, p. 1).
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 9 February 2022 2022/C 69/07
Date: 2022-02-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022069EN.01000701.xml










10.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 69/7






Euro exchange rates (1)

9 February 2022
(2022/C 69/07)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1435 




JPY


Japanese yen


132,04 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4437 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84255 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,4075 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0555 




ISK


Iceland króna


142,20 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,0585 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,288 




HUF


Hungarian forint


352,94 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5135 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9449 




TRY


Turkish lira


15,5510 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5933 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4514 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,9106 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7107 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5349 




KRW


South Korean won


1 365,72 




ZAR


South African rand


17,5281 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,2759 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5285 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 390,99 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7853 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,603 




RUB


Russian rouble


85,5289 




THB


Thai baht


37,404 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,0198 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,4719 




INR


Indian rupee


85,5765 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (OJ L 396, 30.12.2006 , p. 1.)) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 69/09
Date: 2022-02-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: chemical process, chemical product, health control, health risk, market approval, marketing standard, solvent








C_2022069EN.01000901.xml










10.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 69/9






Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)


(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1)
)


(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 69/09)

Decision partially granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holders of the authorisation


Authorisation number


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2022)523


10.2.2022


bis(2-methoxyethyl)ether (diglyme)
EC No 203-924-4; CAS No 111-96-6


Acton Technologies Limited


REACH/22/1/0


as a carrier solvent in the application of sodium naphthalide etchant for fluoropolymer surface modification whilst preserving article structural integrity as regards ES2 and ES5 (downstream user processes)
Refused use


3 February 2026


Risk is adequately controlled in accordance with Article 60(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006.
There are no suitable alternatives.




as a carrier solvent in the formulation and subsequent application of sodium naphthalide etchant for fluoropolymer surface modification whilst preserving article structural integrity (in-house processes)
as a carrier solvent in the application of sodium naphthalide etchant for fluoropolymer surface modification whilst preserving article structural integrity as regards ES1, ES3 and ES4 (downstream user processes)


Not applicable


The application did not demonstrate that the risk is adequately controlled in accordance with Article 60(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006. The application did not demonstrate that socioeconomic benefits outweigh the risk to human health and the environment from the uses of the substance in accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006.






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006 , p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: Authorisation (europa.eu)
Case C-97/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Essen (Germany) lodged on 10 February 2022 — DC v HJ
Date: 2022-02-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: building, consumer protection, damages, termination of a contract








C_2022165EN.01003301.xml










19.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 165/33






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Essen (Germany) lodged on 10 February 2022 — DC v HJ
(Case C-97/22)
(2022/C 165/42)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Essen

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: DC

Defendant: HJ

Question referred

Must Article 14(5) of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) be interpreted as meaning that, in the event that the customer withdraws his or her declaration of intention to conclude an off-premises construction contract only after the trader has already (fully) performed his or her services, it also precludes any entitlement to compensation or compensation for value on the part of the trader where the conditions of entitlement to compensation or compensation for value under the rules governing the legal consequences of withdrawal are not met, but the customer’s assets have been enhanced as a result of the trader’s construction work, that is to say, he or she has been enriched?


(1)  OJ 2011 L 304, p. 64.